On 15 August 2012 07:49, Henri Yandell <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 5:05 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 12 August 2012 18:16, Henri Yandell <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Ambivalent :) >>> >>> I do strongly believe that attic should equal attic-pmc. ie) there's >>> no real issue with the current setup as you should be on the PMC (so >>> should Henning). >> >> There are two disadvantages to this: >> - it forces potential editors to join the PMC; they then need to > > Pretty minor. They are effectively joining the PMC if they want to > engage in CTR anyway, especially in this 'project'.
That's not true of other projects I'm on (Commons, JMeter, HC). CTR is allowed to project members; it's not reserved to PMC members. Where RTC is required it normally applies to PMC as well. >> subscribe to private@attic > > Low volume list, and I don't see that it should be required :) Then one is not participating fully as a PMC member. >> - updating the PMC requires a vote and a board ACK > > Fair point on the 72h delay being a pain the first time. > >> An alternative might be to permit @members (or even @committers) to >> edit the Attic site. > > +1. Was that for @members? Or @committers? > > I'd love to go further and declare all of @members to be on the PMC > (and not require subscription). Not sure why that would be a helpful. What is the point of being on a PMC unless one participates - which IMO requires following private@ ? Also PMCs are a legal structure; not sure it would be possible to bypass the vote/board ACK. > Hen
